it doesn't matter who is interested. it's where woodson will sign, and it will be some where either warm weather with a moderate chance for success, or a team with a great chance of winning the super bowl.

plus he's not the type of dude to sign with a division rival. he's not a tool like favre, longwell, and to a lesser extent sharper.

ya know, hypothetically, if Woodson would sign with an NFC North rival, he goes from the "classy guy" to "tool".

Thats just how its going to be. I wouldn't label him any different, but I doubt he'll be a Viking. I think Seattle makes the most sense for him.

Where does he play? I think they are happy with Thomas at FS and Chancellor at SS. Woodson can't play outside even if he could Browner and Sherman are way better. And they seem very high on Jeremy Lane playing nickle. Unless you think he sould play dime?_________________

Probably because a mod couldn't wait a couple of minutes for me to add my comment on the thread, got locked while i was editing.

In all fairness, you've been told many times. You also shouldn't need to edit a post for your thoughts. You just have this undying urge to break news here on FF like your gonna get a gold star or something._________________

it doesn't matter who is interested. it's where woodson will sign, and it will be some where either warm weather with a moderate chance for success, or a team with a great chance of winning the super bowl.

plus he's not the type of dude to sign with a division rival. he's not a tool like favre, longwell, and to a lesser extent sharper.

and he's not desperate like ferguson.

that doesnt make any sense. if he wants to go to a rival good for him. he got released he is free to go anywhere guilt free. if he was set for free agency and got a good offer from the packers, then left for the vikings, then ya its a tool move....but being released means its all fair game. you cant go "o we dont want you anymore, but dont go to a divisional rival because you dont wanna be a tool."_________________

vikingsvikings wrote:

I don't understand most of that, but I can tell it's probably inaccurate.

...That Rodgers is going to get another contract soon. That's what it says.

Someone doesn't watch the Packers.

He doesn't have the long speed to play on the outside anymore, lost a lot of his short area quickness and strength so he's not forcing nearly as many turnovers nor helping against the run like he used to. Our safety unit SUCKS even with Charles, so why pay him more than a million or two a year, if at all? I've been saying since last year we should just move on sooner than later.

He simply doesn't have the range anymore, even to play safety reliably. I would honestly love it if he went to a NFC contender and started because I think he's a guy you try to isolate in coverage and attack.

Be my guest and ignore my post, go on thinking he's still got it. I've watched every snap he's taken as a Packer, he is no longer the DPOY talent. Love the guy to death but if you can't reliably cover 1v1 and aren't making a lot of turnovers as well as not having a true position on defense, you aren't a great piece to have around.

...That Rodgers is going to get another contract soon. That's what it says.

Well, the safety situation has absolutely nothing to do with that fact. Rodgers being the best player in the NFL and making half of what the top QBs does.

I understand what you're alluding to, but Woodson had only one more year while Rodgers has 2, so essentially GB could have kept Woody and gotten his $10million off the books in time to extend Rodgers a full year before his contract runs out too.

Woodson just isn't that good anymore. He's an in the box safety that's a liability covering the slot.